The Guilt Offering

by PRASHER, G. | Category: The Guilt Offering | Oct 1957

In the Guilt or Trespass offering the Loan required a ram without blemish, according to the priest's estimation in silver by shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary (Leviticus 5.15). Here a contrast is seen as against the sin offering which, as we have shown, could be a bullock, a ram, a lamb, or birds, or even fine flour. The shekel of the sanctuary reminds us that the evaluation of the sacrifice must be after God's standard, and not according to that of the one who commits the trespass. There are many who regard their own doings as sufficient to satisfy God in respect to their guilt : but no ! the guilty one must listen to what God requires, and accept God's conditions and remedy. It was just here that Cain went wrong. Both Abel and he desired to be accepted by God, hence their offerings; but instead of attending to what a thrice holy God required he brought what he had produced from his tilling of the ground, only to find that he was rejected. Alas! that there are so many like Cain today who vainly hope for acceptance with God on the ground of their good works, though God has spoken so plainly in the matter, as in the words, "All our righteousnesses are as a polluted garment" (Isaiah 64.6).

The trespass and guilt of man brought death, and in the epistle to the Romans, which presents the doctrine of the gospel, we find the divine evaluation for the Trespass Offering - One who is the Son of God, Jesus Christ our Lord (Romans 1.3, 4). He is of such infinite worth that only God Himself can estimate His value. Adam, who trespassed, is a figure of Him that was to come, and by the trespass of the one the many died, and death reigned, and the judgement came unto all men to condemnation; but through Him who became the great Trespass Offering the grace of God, and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound unto the many (see Romans 5.12-21). He "was delivered up for our trespasses, and was raised for our justification " (4.25).

With David we can say,

"Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man unto whom the LORD imputeth not iniquity"

(Psalm 32.1, 2).

Sin has been spoken of as the root, transgression as the shoot, and iniquity as the fruit. There is in our nature a root of sin as the result of the Fall, and from it spring the trespasses, the transgressions, which are hateful to God, and harmful to men; and both sin and trespass offerings of Leviticus 4, 5 and 6 have to do with sins and trespasses which spring from that root of sin within. How pleasing for us to appreciate that the cross-work of Christ has dealt with sin as to root, shoot and fruit! There is therefore in the Person and work of the Lord Jesus provision for our every need. "The free gift came of many trespasses unto justification," and thereafter we can come and claim the value of the blood for sins and trespasses which we confess and know will be forgiven, because He, Jesus Christ our Advocate, "is the propitiation for our sins" (1 John 2.1, 2).

Of the trespass offering then we read, "If any one commit a trespass, and sin unwittingly, in the holy things of the LORD; then he shall bring ... a ram without blemish" (Leviticus 5. 15). These holy things would include things set apart for the LORD, as the firstlings of flock or herd. These the LORD claimed. " The firstling of an ox, or the firstling of a sheep, or the firstling of a goat, thou shalt not redeem; they are holy: thou shalt sprinkle their blood upon the altar, and shalt burn their fat for an offering made by fire, for a sweet savour unto the LORD. And the flesh of them shall be thine, as the wave breast and as the right thigh, it shall be thine. All the heave offerings of the holy things, which the children of Israel offer unto the LORD, have I given thee" (Numbers 18.17-19). It was verily possible for an Israelite or a priest to trespass in these holy things of the LORD. Then the one who had erred "shall bring his guilt offering unto the LORD, a ram without blemish." Like the other offerings it had to be perfect to be accepted, and thus it was a type of Christ, the perfect One of whom it is written, "Thou shalt make His soul a guilt offering " (Isaiah 53.10, R.V.M.). This perfection on the part of Christ is indicated in the words, "Jesus Christ the righteous ... the propitiation for our sins." He was righteousness personified.

Not alone did the LORD require a ram to be offered where there was a trespass in the holy things, but He also ordered that restitution be made, and this with the fifth part added was to be given to the priest. Thus there was the ram for a sacrifice, the value of the thing in question restored, and the fifth part of the value added. This matter of restitution is a feature in the trespass offering. It is not seen in the other offerings. What comfort to us to realize that He who is our Trespass Offering has made the restitution shadowed here! Of Him it is prophetically written, " Then I restored that which I took not away" (Psalm 69.4). All that was lost to God in the Fall has been restored to God by our great Trespass Offering, but more than that, He has added to it. In truth it has been said that God gains more in redemption than He lost in the Fall. There will be a richer harvest from the fields of redemption than could have come from creation: there will be a more lofty song, in view of the empty tomb, than from the wonders of creation. Wrong has not only been righted, but an eternal advantage gained by the work of the cross.

We have now to draw attention to the closing paragraph of Leviticus 5. "If any one sin, and do any of the things which the LORD hath commanded not to be done; though he knew it not, yet is he guilty, and shall bear his iniquity " (verse 17). Lack of knowledge does not exonerate. It is also so in the law of England. It is futile to plead ignorance when we break the law, and so with the law of the LORD, "though he knew it not, yet is he guilty." This should cause us to be diligent to know and understand the will of the Lord, and give effect to it, for God will hold us responsible seeing He has caused His will to be made known in the Holy Scriptures. The trespass or guilt offering had to be brought when the trespass was discovered, and the assurance is given that "he shall be forgiven." There are sins of omission as well as commission, and we wonder that so many of the Lord's dear children are without concern in respect to such commands as disciples' baptism, and "this do in remembrance of Me." Oh that such persons would "cease to do evil," and, "learn to do well" ! Then forgiveness could be theirs also.

There were two classes of trespass offerings, (1) that in the holy things, and (2) trespass against a neighbour. In the former the order is sacrifice and restitution ; in the second it is restitution and sacrifice. "Then it shall be, if he hath sinned, and is guilty, that he shall restore that which he took by robbery, or the thing which he hath gotten by oppression, or the deposit which was committed to him, or the lost thing which he found, or any thing about which he hath sworn falsely; he shall even restore it in full, and shall add the fifth part more thereto: unto him to whom it appertaineth shall he give it, in the day of his being found guilty" (Leviticus 6.4, 5).

In these offerings there is rectification in respect to God and to man, and where man is concerned the restitution must come first. This brings to mind the teaching of the Lord, " If therefore thou art offering thy gift before the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee, first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift" (Matthew 5.23, 24). Old and New Testaments join to impress on us the importance of being right with one another, and if we fail in regard to our brother we must fail in our service toward God. Indeed the gift at the altar will not be acceptable unless we first make this restitution. Great grace at times is needed so to act, but great blessing must follow obedience to the will of the Lord in this matter.

The trespass of the one man, Adam, was not a sin of ignorance. We are told, "Adam was not beguiled, but the woman being beguiled hath fallen into transgression " (1 Timothy 2. 14). With his eyes open Adam took of the forbidden fruit and ate thereof. He knew what he was doing. "After the likeness of Adam's transgression " are these sins mentioned in the beginning of chapter 6. When a person is guilty of robbery, of oppression, of dealing falsely in the matter of a deposit, or a lost thing which he found, he usually is well aware of what he is doing. It is obvious, therefore, that we must distinguish between these and those presumptuous sins referred to in Numbers 15.30. Those were sins unto death. The divine requirement being "that soul shall be cut off from among his people" ; "that soul shall be utterly cut off, his iniquity shall be upon him." Here in contrast restitution could be made, and a trespass offering resorted to, " and he shall be forgiven."

Not only was the transgressor to restore in full that wherein he had wronged his neighbour in, but he had to add the fifth part more to it.

From this we note that the defrauded person or party benefited by the divine arrangement. He had more when the matter was put to rights than before he was wronged. There is something very beautiful about this, and perhaps we could consider it as connected with an aggrieved brother in our day. Instead of going the minimum length in the matter of making restitution for wrong done, we should be willing to go beyond in the spirit of adding the fifth part more.

"This is the law of the guilt offering : it is most holy. In the place where they kill the burnt offering; shall they kill the guilt offering; and the blood shall he sprinkle on the altar round about" (Leviticus 7. 1, 2). Thus the guilt offering is like the sin offering-most holy. It would appear that the Lord the Spirit is taking special care in the matter to make certain regarding the holiness of these offerings. We might have been inclined to think of them differently seeing they were for sin and guilt, but they were most holy. The fat was burnt on the altar of burnt offerings, and the flesh was eaten by the males among the priest; unless, in the case of the sin offering where the blood was taken inside the holy place. But this does not apply to the trespass offering. The holiness of the trespass offerings is further indicated in that the priests who ate of them had to do so in a holy place. May we as priests in the House of God be helped to continue in that sphere and in that condition which will permit of our feeding on our great Trespass Offering!

PRASHER, G. | Oct 1957
The Guilt Offering